How can I join three or four SQL tables that DO NOT have an equal amount of rows while ensuring that there are no duplicates of a primary/foreign key?
Structure:
Table1: id, first_name, last_name, email
Table2: id (independent of id in table 1), name, location, table1_id, table2_id
Table3: id, name, location
I want all of the data from table 1, then all of the data from table 2 corresponding with the table1_id without duplicates.
Kind of tricky for a new guy...
Not sure what do you want to do with Table3.
A LEFT JOIN returns all records from the LEFT table, and the matched records from the right table. If there is no match (from the right side), then the result is NULL.
So per example:
SELECT * FROM Table1 AS t
LEFT JOIN Table2 AS tt
ON t.id = tt.id
The LEFT table refers to the table statement before the LEFT JOIN, and the RIGHT table refers to the table statement after the LEFT JOIN. If you want to add in Table3 as well, use the same logic:
SELECT * FROM Table1 AS t
LEFT JOIN Table2 AS tt
ON t.id = tt.id
LEFT JOIN Table3 AS ttt
ON t.id = ttt.id
Note, that I use alias names for the tables (by using AS), so that I can more easily refer to a specific table. For example, t refers to Table1, tt refers to Table2, and ttt refers to Table3.
Joins are often used in SQL, therefore it is useful to look into: INNER JOIN, RIGHT JOIN, FULL JOIN, and SELF JOIN, as well.
Hope this helps.
Good luck with learning!
You will want to use an LEFT JOIN
SELECT * FROM table1 LEFT JOIN table2 ON Table1.ID = Table2.table1_id
Related
I need to join two tables together based on a three-column key stack. The problem is sometimes one of the key columns is translated and mapped differently in another table. I will attempt to example my issue using code:
select t1.TQ
from table1 t1
left join table2 t2 on t1.comp_cd = t2.comp_cd and t1.plcy_frm = t2.plcy_frm
and t1.val_cd = t2.val_cd
The columns "comp_cd" and "plcy_frm" are fine, however the problem is with val_cd. Sometimes the val_cd in table2 does not map correctly to table1 and must go through a third table, table3. Table3 structure is below:
Val_Cd Mapped_Val_Cd
A123 A564
So -> I need to join on Mapped_Val_Cd value when it exists in Table3, but join on Val_Cd from Table2 when Val_Cd does not exist in Table3.
I hope this makes sense - I have tried Case when exists syntax but cannot get that to work.
Assuming there are no duplicates in table3, you can left join it in and then choose the value that you want in the on clause:
select t1.TQ
from table1 t1 left join
table3 t3
on t1.val_cd = t3.val_cd
table2 t2
on t1.comp_cd = t2.comp_cd and
t1.plcy_frm = t2.plcy_frm and
t1.val_cd = coalesce(t3.Mapped_Val_Cd, t2.val_cd);
I am trying to write an SQL query that will return Table1, which has 10 columns. This table consists of a primary key id, 4 foreign key Id columns, and 5 other columns that I want to return but not change. The goal is to do a join to replace the foreign key Ids with their descriptions that are held in other tables.
Here is one attempt with the first FK Id:
Select * from Table1 t1
left join Table2 t2
on t1.BranchId = t2.BranchId;
This left join returns the description from table2, but does not replace it.
Here is another with the first FK Id:
Select t2.BranchName from Table1 t1
left join Table2 t2
on t1.BranchId = t2.BranchId;
This returns the name I want, but does not return table1 fully.
For the sake of an example you could pretend that OtherName3, OtherName4, OtherName5 are in tables Table3, Table4, Table5, respectively.
This may seem trivial for experienced SQL devs, but I am having a hard time figuring out the syntax.
Thanks!
I'm not sure what you mean by replace it.
I think you just need to list out all the columns you want:
Select t1.col1, t1.col2, t1.col3, . . .,
t2.name
from Table1 t1 left join
Table2 t2
on t1.BranchId = t2.BranchId;
I don't know what you mean by 'replace' but you just need to qualify what columns from which table you want. That goes for all tables you are joined to, especially if they have the same column name in multiple tables. I put junk columns in since I don't know your tables but you should get the general idea.
Select t2.BranchName, t1.BranchId, t1.Name, t1.Amount, t2.BranchLocation from Table1 t1
left join Table2 t2
on t1.BranchId = t2.BranchId;
I think this is what you are looking for:
select t1.*, t2.BranchName from Table1 t1
left join Table2 t2
on t1.BranchId = t2.BranchId;
Return Table1 fully (all columns) and only the description (BranchName) from Table2.
If using SQL Server, see all syntax options for the SELECT clause here:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms176104.aspx
I have 3 tables of accounts that all contain the same fields. Table1 contains all accounts while Table2 and Table3 contain subsets of the accounts. I'm trying to select records in Table1 that do no exist in Table2 or Table3.
Let's say the table layout is like this and is the same for all 3 tables:
|AcctNum|Name|State|
I know how to do this if it was just Table1 and Table2, using a left join and Is Null, but the 3rd table is throwing me. Is this possible to do in one query? Can you combine left joins? I should point out I'm using Access 2010.
Yes you can combine left joins and with the odd syntax Access uses the query should look like this:
SELECT T1.AcctNum
FROM (Table1 AS T1 LEFT JOIN Table2 AS T2 ON T1.AcctNum = T2.AcctNum)
LEFT JOIN Table3 AS T3 ON T1.AcctNum = T3.AcctNum
WHERE (((T2.AcctNum) Is Null) AND ((T3.AcctNum) Is Null));
You can use Access to create a view called TableCombined that is a union of both Table2 and Table3.
At that point, you can use your left join and Is Null query and join TableCombined to Table1.
Hope this helps!
You can also do a NOT EXISTS statement which makes sense logically for what you are trying to achieve.
For example:
SELECT ACCTNUM
FROM TABLE1
WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT TABLE2.ACCTNUM FROM TABLE2 INNER JOIN TABLE3 WHERE TABLE2.ACCTNUM IS NULL AND TABLE3.ACCTNUM IS NULL)
I have two tables in my database, one holds the names of files, and other holds records of information described in them, inincluding sizes of sections. it can be descrived as:
Table1: id as integer, name as varchar
Table2: recid as integer primary key, file_id as integer, score as float
Between the tables there is an one-to-many link, from Table1.id to table2.file_id. What i need is for every file which name matches a certain pattern retrieve the id of the linked record with the maximum score and the score itself.
So far i have used:
SELECT name,MAX(score)
FROM Table1
LEFT OUTER JOIN Table2 ON Table2.file_id=Table1.id
WHERE name LIKE :pattern
GROUP BY name
but i cannot retrieve the id of the record in Table2 this way.
The dialect i am using is Sqlite.
What query should be used to retrieve data on the record that has maximum score for every file?
Update:
With this query, i am getting close to what i want:
SELECT name,score,recid
FROM Table1
LEFT OUTER JOIN Table2 ON file_id=id
WHERE name LIKE :pattern
GROUP BY name
HAVING score=MAX(score)
However, this leaves out the entries in the first table that have no corresponding entries in the second table out. How can i ensure they are in the end result anyway? Should i use UNION, and if so - how?
This can actually be achieved without a GROUP BY by using a brilliantly simple technique described by #billkarwin here:
SELECT name, t2.score
FROM Table1 t1
LEFT OUTER JOIN Table2 t2 ON t2.file_id = t1.id
LEFT OUTER JOIN Table2 t2copy ON t2copy.file_id = t2.file_id
AND t2.score < t2copy.score
WHERE name LIKE :pattern
AND t2copy.score IS NULL
See SQL Fiddle demo.
I think that you must use a subquery
SELECT name, recid, score
FROM Table1
LEFT OUTER JOIN Table2 ON Table2.file_id=Table1.id
WHERE name LIKE :pattern AND score = (SELECT MAX(score) FROM Table2.score)
I think the easiest way to do this is with a correlated subquery:
SELECT name, recid, score
FROM Table1 LEFT OUTER JOIN
Table2
ON Table2.file_id=Table1.id
WHERE name LIKE :pattern AND
score = (SELECT MAX(t2.score)
FROM Table1 t1 LEFT OUTER JOIN
Table2 t2
ON t2.file_id=t1.id
where t1.name = table1.name
);
Note that you need table aliases to distinguish the tables in the inner query from the outer query. I am guessing which tables the columns are actually coming from.
For example, there are two tables:
create table Table1 (id int, Name varchar (10))
create table Table2 (id int, Name varchar (10))
Table1 data as follows:
Id Name
-------------
1 A
2 B
Table2 data as follows:
Id Name
-------------
1 A
2 B
3 C
If I execute both below mentioned SQL statements, both outputs will be the same:
select *
from Table1
left join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
select *
from Table2
right join Table1 on Table1.id = Table2.id
Please explain the difference between left and right join in the above SQL statements.
Select * from Table1 left join Table2 ...
and
Select * from Table2 right join Table1 ...
are indeed completely interchangeable. Try however Table2 left join Table1 (or its identical pair, Table1 right join Table2) to see a difference. This query should give you more rows, since Table2 contains a row with an id which is not present in Table1.
Table from which you are taking data is 'LEFT'.
Table you are joining is 'RIGHT'.
LEFT JOIN: Take all items from left table AND (only) matching items from right table.
RIGHT JOIN: Take all items from right table AND (only) matching items from left table.
So:
Select * from Table1 left join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
gives:
Id Name
-------------
1 A
2 B
but:
Select * from Table1 right join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
gives:
Id Name
-------------
1 A
2 B
3 C
you were right joining table with less rows on table with more rows
AND
again, left joining table with less rows on table with more rows
Try:
If Table1.Rows.Count > Table2.Rows.Count Then
' Left Join
Else
' Right Join
End If
You seem to be asking, "If I can rewrite a RIGHT OUTER JOIN using LEFT OUTER JOIN syntax then why have a RIGHT OUTER JOIN syntax at all?" I think the answer to this question is, because the designers of the language didn't want to place such a restriction on users (and I think they would have been criticized if they did), which would force users to change the order of tables in the FROM clause in some circumstances when merely changing the join type.
select fields
from tableA --left
left join tableB --right
on tableA.key = tableB.key
The table in the from in this example tableA, is on the left side of relation.
tableA <- tableB
[left]------[right]
So if you want to take all rows from the left table (tableA), even if there are no matches in the right table (tableB), you'll use the "left join".
And if you want to take all rows from the right table (tableB), even if there are no matches in the left table (tableA), you will use the right join.
Thus, the following query is equivalent to that used above.
select fields
from tableB
right join tableA on tableB.key = tableA.key
Your two statements are equivalent.
Most people only use LEFT JOIN since it seems more intuitive, and it's universal syntax - I don't think all RDBMS support RIGHT JOIN.
I feel we may require AND condition in where clause of last figure of Outer Excluding JOIN so that we get the desired result of A Union B Minus A Interaction B.
I feel query needs to be updated to
SELECT <select_list>
FROM Table_A A
FULL OUTER JOIN Table_B B
ON A.Key = B.Key
WHERE A.Key IS NULL AND B.Key IS NULL
If we use OR , then we will get all the results of A Union B
select *
from Table1
left join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
In the first query Left join compares left-sided table table1 to right-sided table table2.
In Which all the properties of table1 will be shown, whereas in table2 only those properties will be shown in which condition get true.
select *
from Table2
right join Table1 on Table1.id = Table2.id
In the first query Right join compares right-sided table table1 to left-sided table table2.
In Which all the properties of table1 will be shown, whereas in table2 only those properties will be shown in which condition get true.
Both queries will give the same result because the order of table declaration in query are different like you are declaring table1 and table2 in left and right respectively in first left join query, and also declaring table1 and table2 in right and left respectively in second right join query.
This is the reason why you are getting the same result in both queries. So if you want different result then execute this two queries respectively,
select *
from Table1
left join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
select *
from Table1
right join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
Select * from Table1 t1 Left Join Table2 t2 on t1.id=t2.id
By definition: Left Join selects all columns mentioned with the "select" keyword from Table 1 and the columns from Table 2 which matches the criteria after the "on" keyword.
Similarly,By definition: Right Join selects all columns mentioned with the "select" keyword from Table 2 and the columns from Table 1 which matches the criteria after the "on" keyword.
Referring to your question, id's in both the tables are compared with all the columns needed to be thrown in the output. So, ids 1 and 2 are common in the both the tables and as a result in the result you will have four columns with id and name columns from first and second tables in order.
*select *
from Table1
left join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
The above expression,it takes all the records (rows) from table 1 and columns, with matching id's from table 1 and table 2, from table 2.
select *
from Table2
right join Table1 on Table1.id = Table2.id**
Similarly from the above expression,it takes all the records (rows) from table 1 and columns, with matching id's from table 1 and table 2, from table 2. (remember, this is a right join so all the columns from table2 and not from table1 will be considered).